1. Europe fills funding gaps
Planned Parenthood, 7-2-7
(http://www.plannedparenthood.org/news-articles-press/politics-policy-issues/international-issues/global-gag-rule-15079.htm)
Other donor countries and organizations have stepped in to fill the “decency gap” created by the U.S. when it withdrew support for sexual and reproductive health programs in the developing world. The European Development Fund began channeling support to IPPF and UNFPA, the United Nations Population Fund, in direct response to the U.S. decisions to defund global reproductive health efforts (Cohen, 2004). The Safe Abortion Action Fund was launched by the United Kingdom government in February 2006. It aims to offset global gag rule-related funding losses and promote safe abortion around the world (Boseley, 2006; DFID, 2006). The UK has been joined by the governments of Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland and other donors in contributing to the fund, which will be distributed to nongovernmental organizations who apply to work in the areas of advocacy, operations research, and service delivery (IPPF, 2007). The UK’s counterpart to USAID, the Department for International Development (DFID), elected the International Planned Parenthood Federation to administer the fund (DFID, 2006).

2. The State-Foreign Operations Appropriations bill allows family planning funding
Planned Parenthood, 6-22-7
(Planned Parenthood Applauds House Vote to Support International Family Planning, http://www.commondreams.org/news2007/0622-11.htm)
Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) today applauds the vote by the House of Representatives to dramatically improve access to family planning supplies as part of the FY2008 State-Foreign Operations Appropriations bill (HR 2764). PPFA also appreciates House members for rejecting attempts by family planning opponents, Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) and Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI), and Rep. Joe Pitts (R-PA), to strip from the bill two key global family planning provisions that expand access to birth control services and information. These provisions are the “Contraceptives and Condoms Exemption” from the Global Gag Rule, and the “Abstinence-Until-Marriage” Earmark Waiver in the, the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). “We live in a world where a woman dies of a pregnancy-related complication every minute and someone gets HIV every six and a half seconds — due primarily to the limited availability of contraception and the information necessary to make responsible health care decisions," said PPFA President Cecile Richards. “This vote is a significant step forward in the fight to improve the health and safety of women and families around the world. Through this exemption and waiver, women, men, and young people will have access to the information and tools they need to plan their families and protect their health." Disease prevention and reproductive health are among the most pressing international health issues. More than 200 million women in developing countries want to delay or end childbearing but lack access to modern contraceptives. Additionally, nearly 40 million people worldwide are infected with HIV/AIDS, and millions more, especially women and young people, are at risk. Improved access to contraceptive methods, like condoms, could prevent 52 million unintended pregnancies, 22 million induced abortions, 1.4 million infant deaths, and 142,000 pregnancy-related deaths per year, as well as prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS, thus saving millions of lives. Currently, the Global Gag Rule prohibits international family planning agencies that provide abortion services, counsel patients on the option of abortion, refer patients to other abortion providers, or advocate for abortion legalization in their own countries from receiving USAID family planning funds, technical assistance, and vitally needed contraceptive supplies. The "Contraceptives and Condoms Exemption" greatly improves access to contraceptives by allowing those agencies that have not signed on to the Global Gag Rule to receive U. S. government-donated contraceptives and condoms. PEPFAR is a five-year, $15 billion, multifaceted initiative designed to combat the spread of HIV/AIDS around the world. Currently, one-third of all PEPFAR prevention dollars must be spent on abstinence-until-marriage programs that deny participants important information about the role of male latex condoms in preventing the spread of HIV/AIDS. With today’s passage of the FY2008 State-Foreign Operations Appropriation bill, the president will have the authority to waive the PEPFAR earmark and thus greatly expand the funding available for the development of culturally appropriate, medically accurate HIV/AIDS prevention programs including those that provide the information and tools necessary to prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS. “Today's vote puts America back on the right track when it comes to family planning, ” added Richards. “We thank our friends in the House of Representatives who voted to greatly improve access to contraception, including condoms, and vital HIV/AIDS prevention information. ”


3. Helms amendment blocks funding
Janet Benshoof, president of the Center for Reproductive Law and policy, 3-26-7
(Janet Benshoof’s Remarks Upon Receiving the Edith I. Spivack Award, http://www.nycla.org/siteFiles/Publications/Publications320_0.pdf)
The global censorship of abortion speech orchestrated by the United States, has fully saturated the U. N. and reaches inside over 170 countries. There are two restrictions, but only one has been subject to criticism, the gag rule. Under the gag rule over 400 nonprofit groups world wide will loose all U. S. health and democracy grants if they discuss abortion, even with their own funds. Women's groups in Iran are freer to discuss abortion (and their law has been liberalized) than women in Iraq where USAID money to women's groups preclude them from legal or public health discussions regarding abortion law. However pernicious this gag rule is, however, its repeal would not stop the problem. We must kill the virus which foments it, the Helms amendment. The 1973 Helms Amendment to the FAA prohibits US funding of any abortion services or speech except in cases of life or rape or incest. Although such funding is allowed in those cases the U. S. has never permitted it. For example, right now we could help the women in Sudan who suffer rape and forced pregnancy as war crimes. Abortion in the case of rape is legal in the Sudan, it is legal under Helms, but who is speaking up for this medical service to survivors? The Helms censorship has meant that all U. N. agencies now follow its strictures. UNFPA alone imposes censorship on abortion speech in all its projects, ones funded by some 171 donor countries totaling over $350 million annually.

4. Multiple loopholes
Barbara B Crane, Executive Vice President, Ipas and Jennifer Dusenberry, Research Assistant, Population Action International, 4
(Power and Politics in International Funding for Reproductive Health: the US Global Gag Rule, www.sciencedirect.com)
Significantly, the policy explicitly allows NGOs to continue to treat the complications of unsafe abortions (post-abortion care). It also allows referral of a pregnant woman elsewhere if she specifically asks where a safe, legal abortion can be obtained. Abortion-related research is also permitted.[3.] It should be further noted that as emergency contraception is not a form of abortion, it is legally allowed under the current Gag Rule. [4.] Moreover, the Gag Rule does not apply to other non-family planning US assistance such as child survival. [5.] Finally, the Gag Rule exempts governments receiving US assistance as well as US-based NGOs, whose activities are not limited if they are using non-USAID funds. However, if US NGOs are implementing overseas programmes with US funding, they are legally responsible for enforcing the Gag Rule's restrictions on their NGO partners in those countries.

5. Doesn’t reduce funding
House Press Release, 6-20-7
(http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/ok05_fallin/mexicocity.shtml)
U.S. Rep. Mary Fallin, R – Oklahoma, and several other Pro-Life Congresswomen spoke out today against the pro-abortion measures placed in the latest Congressional spending bill. The State Foreign/Operations Appropriations bill would authorize U.S. taxpayer money to support international organizations that practice or advocate abortion as a method of “family planning.” Under the Mexico City Policy, originally instated by President Reagan, those organizations were previously barred from receiving U.S. assistance.The Mexico City Policy does not affect funding for family planning programs that do not promote abortion, nor does it affect the overall funding levels for HIV/AIDS prevention.

6. Turn—Undermines prevention methods
Catholic Online, 6-20-7
(http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=24459)
In the letter, Cardinal Rigali notes that the appropriations bill also contains “a harmful provision nullifying the current allocation of one-third of AIDS prevention funds for abstinence programs that have proven to be very effective in Africa.” He urged the congressmen to “follow the wise counsel … from our bishops’ conferernce and Catholic Relief Services” and agree to retain current funding. But the primary focus of the letter was international family planning program funding, the goal of which, he said, “should be to reduce abortions.” “Hence, it would be counter-productive to place such programs in the hands of those who perform and promote abortion,” Cardinal Rigali said, adding that this is especially true concerning those organizations “so deeply committed to abortion that they would rather refuse U.S. funds than give up promoting it.” The cardinal pointed to studies that indicate that the inclusion of abortion as a family-planning program “undermines any effectiveness it might have had.” “When abortion is made available alongside preventative methods,” he said, “abortion replaces prevention.”

7. Foreign NGO’s force abortion education ignoring African culture—turns case
Zenit.org, 6-20-7
(Rule Bars Certain Funding for Abortions, http://www.zenit.org/article-19929?l=english)
The Mexico City policy was first announced in that city at the 1984 U. N. International Conference on Population. Member nations urged governments to take appropriate steps to prevent abortions, saying that it should never be considered a method of family planning. And the United States said it would no longer fund nongovernmental organizations violating this international consensus. Cardinal Rigali noted in his letter to the House on Monday that the policy was supported not only by the United States, the Holy See, and many developed nations such as France, Italy and Germany, but also by "the great majority of developing nations, many of whom resent Western efforts to promote abortion to them as a badge of 'progress.'" Not an imposition "This policy was never an imposition by the United States on reluctant developing nations, for it was enthusiastically supported by those nations," Cardinal Rigali affirmed. The 72-year-old prelate continued: "Respect for innocent human life, a due regard for the culture and the rights of vulnerable developing nations, and even the practical concerns of those committed to effective family planning programs all argue for the same conclusion. "Therefore I urge you to support the Stupak/Smith amendment, so the Mexico City Policy can remain in effect." John Haas, president of the National Catholic Bioethics Center, also defended the policy in a letter to the House of Representatives. Haas wrote: "As you know, the Mexico City Policy is an administration policy that attempts to protect impoverished people from policies of overseas nongovernmental organizations which offer or promote abortion as a method of family planning. "There is no stronger message to impoverished people concerning their dignity and worth than to promote polices that respect the life and wellbeing of their next generation. Aid that destroys the lives of the next generation destroys hope."

8. U.S. lacks medical treatment and resorts to abstinence
Africa Action, 6
(http://www.africaaction.org/newsroom/index.php?op=read&documentid=1879&type=15&issues=1)
International support is critical to turning the tide of this pandemic in Africa and globally, but current U.S. policies on HIV/AIDS hinder the African response to this crisis in several ways. In the realm of HIV prevention, the U.S. continues to allow an ideological bias toward abstinence-only programs to bar the way of best practices and evidence-based approaches. When it comes to treatment, the U.S. preference for expensive, brand name medications rather than generic antiretroviral drugs hinders the pursuit of universal access to treatment in Africa and beyond. U.S. funding levels for HIV/AIDS programs have also fallen far short of the response a crisis of this magnitude demands. At the same time, the U.S. failure to provide strong and consistent support for the Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis & Malaria has left this important multilateral initiative without the resources it needs to scale up its HIV/AIDS programs. More than 80 representatives of African civil society met in Abuja, Nigeria in April 2006 to craft a position paper laying out their main concerns and recommendations for action against HIV/AIDS. In May 2006, African Union member states also convened for the five-year review of the “Abuja Declaration on HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Other Related Infectious Diseases.” Through such fora, civil society organizations and governments in Africa have made their priorities clear. An effective response to HIV/AIDS requires a more urgent and comprehensive approach from the U.S. and the international community. It requires greater funding, a scale-up of effective prevention, treatment, care and support programs, support for the rights and needs of women and girls, and new investments in Africa’s human resources and health care infrastructure. But despite these clear priorities, the U.S. continues to pursue policies that betray Africa’s most urgent needs in the fight against HIV/AIDS.